Strongly desirable, but 0% likelihood IMO

I'd love for the President's pardon powers to be restricted to before the election

Very low

I won't put them at zero because you never know what could theoretically happen, but the last amendment was largely accidental and still 28 years ago

The last intentional amendment was ratified 49 years ago https://t.co/Nxzw3aLjcO
No

People shouldn't end up with fewer rights by banding together, that's just silly

https://t.co/r89MtoaBbi
Don't know the precise verbiage, but it would require the Wyoming Rule for House seats and expand the Senate to 3 Senators per state

https://t.co/thgPUwcWh5
Yes: that's the purpose of the House, and the # of electoral votes for President being rooted in the House

https://t.co/O8g8VTX2FR
The population of the smallest state (currently Wyoming) becomes the baseline size for all Congressional districts

It basically automatically increases # of Congresscritters to accommodate population growth, instead of freezing things at the current 435

https://t.co/xwRNbr7dDb
You'd have 1 Senator on the ballot in every state during every election, instead of the current class structure where a third of the states have no Senate elections

https://t.co/ROfgsI6s93
I guess I just have more faith in Democrats that they can win the majority of an institution they had a majority of just a few years ago

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ https://t.co/GO9WmvmysT
"We haven't had the Senate majority since Obama was President, BURN IT ALL DOWN" is a very pissbaby reaction tbh
"The Senate is biased against Democrats" is making my point. It's nonsense

And Wyoming doesn't "get the same representation" as California; Wyoming sends 3 people to Congress, California sends 55 (plus dominates Congressional leadership and the Electoral College) https://t.co/1kjyQ71AeL
If California consents to being divvied up, go for it https://t.co/QXBgJctDCd

More from T. Greg "'Constitutional Lawyer'" Doucette

No


No

https://t.co/9MgwobVvYS


Incitement is speech that is:

1️⃣ intended to cause, and
2️⃣ reasonably likely to cause
3️⃣ imminent
4️⃣ lawless action

It needs all 4 elements

If any of those 4 are missing, it's First-Amendment protected speech

And constitutionally protected speech is never sedition

No


Immediate is imminent
4 minutes from now is imminent
4 hours from now might be imminent but probably is not
4 days from now definitely is not
**********
6TH ANNUAL
BULL CITY FOODRAISER
FINAL METRICS THREAD
**********


Going to fill this thread with the updated final numbers

Prior threads are here –

➡️ Foodraiser history thread:
https://t.co/Hz0jxFrswF

➡️ Initial 6th Annual data thread: https://t.co/XkK4oWE9iT

➡️ 6th Annual results photos + video thread:


You'll recall that we had to buy a sh*tload of grocery bags that were not included in our initial data thread

And then had to buy another sh*tload the next day 🤦‍♂️

Those paper bag runs added $386.94 to the expenditures ($193.47 x 2)

That put the grand total spent at $55,426.68:
➡️ $10 for cashier's check
➡️ $55,029.74 for food
➡️ $386.94 for bags

The Bag Fund donations exceeded what we needed though, so we capped 2020's #'s at actual expenditures and will hold the rest for 2021 (more on that down-thread)


Counting the new donors who contributed to The Bag Fund, and de-duplicating the folks who'd already donated to the main fundraiser, we ended up with 825 total donors
Maximum of 2 hours of floor debate per objection

No requirement to use the whole 2 hours


Doubt it. I think you'll get maybe an hour with Arizona so Congresscritters can get their viral C-SPAN clips, then they'll get bored with it and move on


Correct


The Speaker and the Vice President preside over their respective chambers like normal, then decide who talks


I'd need to go through whatever rules the House adopts tomorrow, they're not my forte
The midterm Congress doesn't matter; it would be the Congress elected in 2024 that takes office on 3 January 2025

But yes, both chambers of Congress acting together have always had the power to install a President. See Hayes-Tilden 1876


Someone has to have the power. Would you rather it be the President? 5 justices of the Supreme Court?

It's functionally impossible to have an election where one party wins the presidency but neither chamber of Congress, and 218 Representatives + 51 Senators agree to toss results


The issue is who is responsible for counting the electoral votes and confirming they're legit. Congress exclusively has that power, and the sheer volume of people that have to be convinced to ignore the results confirms it's the right branch to have it
@Pogman42

If people want to abolish the Electoral College, go for it

But it requires 2/3 of the House + 2/3 of the Senate + 3/4 of state legislatures. It's not an attainable goal, and will not be an attainable goal in our lifetimes

Meanwhile, that energy could be better used elsewhere


Likely unconstitutional, and unenforceable even if it were not
We all have a merry chuckle as they're voted down and we watch preparations for Biden's inauguration continue

Trumpists don't have enough votes in either chamber


Sort of

You'd only get Acting President Nancy Pelosi if the vote counting wasn't done by January 20th when Trump's term ends

1/


Basically, if e.g. Arizona's Biden votes were thrown out, Dems would object to Arkansas or some other state soon after Arizona

When the chambers separate to consider the objection, the House would refer the question to committee first

2/
@philski68

And the committee would intentionally never meet, unless / until there was some deal worked out to let the vote-counting continue without issue

So definitely possible, a point of leverage for Dems, but still exceptionally unlikely

3/3
@philski68

Congress can do whatever it wants – if both chambers agree to it

More from Politics

You May Also Like

One of the most successful stock trader with special focus on cash stocks and who has a very creative mind to look out for opportunities in dark times

Covering one of the most unique set ups: Extended moves & Reversal plays

Time for a 🧵 to learn the above from @iManasArora

What qualifies for an extended move?

30-40% move in just 5-6 days is one example of extended move

How Manas used this info to book


Post that the plight of the


Example 2: Booking profits when the stock is extended from 10WMA

10WMA =


Another hack to identify extended move in a stock:

Too many green days!

Read